It’s March 7th, our regular Monday night class. Good evening to all of you here, and hello to all of you who are listening by way of the Internet? Hopefully you will all find something beneficial in the lecture tonight and practice very diligently.

We’ve been talking about the Chan poem “Song of the Mind” by Niutou Farong (594-657). Last week we were able to use the poem to create some sort of a personal experience, rather than just listen to the words. It’s very easy for me to read the words and have you think, “Oh, that sounds so good,” without you really scratching the surface in terms of how profound these words are. We’re going through this poem in a very slow motion simply because there’s no reason to go through it fast. Going in slow motion enables one to experience the words as the sentiment of the author such that the author’s intention of what he wants to give to you is realized, rather than you just having the words.

There’s a story about this master who couldn’t bring one of his disciples to realization so he told him to go practice with another master. This other master was more in depth with his instruction, and the disciple quickly came to a realization. When he returned to the temple, he went into his master’s chambers and found his master reading the sutras. The young disciple said, “What a shame. You’re seeking it, but it’s three feet in front of you.” What he was essentially saying is that you have to penetrate the sutra. You cannot simply see the sutra as words. You have to make the experience of what you’re reading your own. What you do when you read a sutra or Chan poem or treatise, is try to put yourself in the author’s position and ask, “What does he really want to share?” The information is there for you to get something from it.

On the weekend, I was talking to one of my friends and she asked about a Qigong master that she had been invited to go see for a nominal price of $650. She wanted to know if the master was any good. I looked up his picture and I could tell that yes, he did have a lot of energy and good healing skills. When I told her that, she asked, “You can see that from his picture?” and I said, “Yes, I can tell that from his picture.” Those who are skilled put information into their pictures, sometimes voluntarily, sometimes involuntarily. A lot of times when I take pictures with a group, I put information into the picture intentionally so that I can harmonize with the people who look at it.

I remember when I was teaching Qigong, I took this one picture when I struck a pose and put a lot of energy into it. I got so many students enrolled as a result of that picture! The people could see when they looked at that there was a lot of energy there.

The reason I say that is not for self-aggrandizement, but simply for the idea that there’s information there on a different level that you can access but you have to find a way to access it. You have to use the method. You can’t simply just read the words. You have to use your heart to practice, and your heart-mind to feel what the master is trying to do. You want to turn the mind’s eye inward to look at it from the master’s point of view. The information is there. It’s not simply words, even if it’s not a great translation. If the essence is there, and the translator’s heart is there, it will be good. This particular version of this poem was translated by Master Sheng-Yen so that’s why it’s a very, very good one. I’ve read other versions of Song of the Mind that are very poor and don’t really capture the feeling or essence like this one. When that essence comes through, then you have to find the way to tap it.

When you meditate, it’s the same thing, but it’s very different because you’re not looking at words, you’re looking directly into mind, and you have to find a way to access mind. Accessing mind is simply putting aside thoughts; not casting them out but simply putting them aside. You put them aside through wisdom by seeing them clearly as they are as they are arising, and knowing these thoughts are not mind itself, but not separate from mind either. What appears to be a contradiction is resolved when one begins to practice in the proper way.

That’s kind of the preface for today. I’ll read back through the poem from the beginning, and then we’ll pick up where we left off.

The nature of the mind is non-arising,What need is there of knowledge and views?

This is very interesting line and we’ll talk about it more later because subsequent masters confuse the meaning of this.

Coming and going without beginning;Sought for, it is not seen.No need to do anything;It is bright, still, self-apparent.

The past is like empty space;Know anything and theBasic principle is lost,

“The past is like empty space,” what he’s trying to say here is that if you try to cling to things that you should have, would have, could have done, you’re living in the past, and the past is gone. There’s no way you can pick it up. He’ saying part of the refutation of time by Nagarjuna in the Madhyamaka where he refutes this, but he’s picking on the past and saying there is no past. It’s like empty space. That doesn’t mean that it’s totally gone, but it’s just within mind. One cannot necessarily by its nature retrieve it, at least as an ego, personality, or life in being.

“Know anything and the basic principle is lost.” This is when you think “I got it. I understand this.” There are so many people you’ll run into that will be like this even if they’ve only gotten a small realization. The ones who’ve only had a small realization are actually the worst, because they simply stop there and think they got it, when they actually just got a peek and need to practice and practice until they see how silly it would have been to stay where they’re at. You never give up and say, “I know it. I got it!” That wouldn’t make any sense.

Casting a clear light on the world, Illuminating, yet obscured.

Here, you’re seeing everything as it is—this idea of suchness or thusness—clearly seeing what is manifesting in this moment, and seeing clearly the things that are manifesting around you. The next line, however, is a very interesting one, because it says it’s illuminating, but it’s still obscured. What do you think that means?

Student: I have had this experience with my flashlight. I’ll be pointing my flashlight at something, and there is a shadow of the actual bulb between the bulb and the reflection, and sometimes it’s a metaphor for I’m still reaching, and it helps me to realize that no matter how hard I try, trying too hard sometimes blocks me.

Gilbert: Anybody else?

Another Student: Their self is still there. That’s the obscuring part.

Third Student: Is it because it illuminates the physical form, but if you’re looking at form only, then you’re still not seeing mind?

Gilbert: There you go.

I had this book called Magic Eye that had pictures of what look like squiggly lines, but if you look at them from a different perspective, then a picture within a picture would appear. This is the way it is; it’s illuminated, yet obscured. This is a very important line, because this master was set upon by other masters who said, “You missed the basic element, because you said that there’s no need of knowledge and views, etc… and what you’re saying is that there’s this one mind, but you failed to touch upon the Two Truths Doctrine of the Madhyamaka School.” Anyone know what the two truths are?

Student: Relative and absolute

Gilbert: Yes, relative truth and absolute truth. They were saying he missed that part, but he didn’t. He hit it right on the head with this last line. They just didn’t see it. He’s saying there it is. There’s this relative truth, and it’s illuminating this phenomena, yet it’s obscured within the phenomena, and the basic essence of it is this impermanence.

Student: The language when it says illuminating, casting a clear light, it is phenomena that are being picked up when the eye has not been turned.

Gilbert: No, I think you’re missing this a little bit. And forgive me because I should have given you something to read from. It says, “Casting a clear light on the world,” and this is a reference to using this Prajnaparamita, this deep wisdom, to see things so wherever you look, you see clearly how the world works. And essentially you’re aware of causes and conditions, so this is Pratityasamutpada. But when he’s saying it’s “Illuminating, yet obscured,” it means if you look for it, you won’t find it, but if you just simply rest the mind, it’s self-apparent in the self-nature of the mind, and one can see it everywhere.

This is an important aspect, because it still resonates in the Two Truth Doctrine of the Madhyamaka School, but it enables one to see it in an instant, not with your eyes, but with your heart. All of the sudden there’s this jolt that brings all of it into perfect focus and clarity. You're still seeing the same things. It's still mundane and ordinary, but the wondrous function of the mind is hidden within that mundane and ordinary. When you first look at the picture, you just see a bunch of squiggly lines, but then you look deeper and see there’s a beautiful picture within. It’s within; you cannot separate out that wonderful picture you see—in 3D no less—from its self. It’s engrained within it.

It’s a very good analogy to me, because you’re still looking at the squiggly lines, but there’s something very incredible within that which is the self-nature of mind. And the only way to see it is to look at it in a way that you don’t normally look at pictures. That’s the same thing that we do. When we meditate, we don’t look for mind with our mind’s eye. We just let it arise naturally, and what happens is that what appears to be obscured is no longer. We know within everything we see is this relative truth, and that within it is this absolute truth. There’s no duality there. There’s just this single-mindedness.

If one-mindedness is impeded, All dharmas are misunderstood.

The idea of one-mindedness is the fusion of the two truths. When those are fused, and they’re reconciled, we say, “I must be alive because when I look in the mirror I see myself.” That’s the relative truth, and the absolute truth is that there’s nothing there, just simply emptiness. This one-mindedness is powered by a very high level of wisdom, and that is generated by your own innate wisdom that’s already there—what they call the unborn or uncreated. When we derive power from our power that we already have within us, that generates an incredible burst of wisdom.

Wisdom is not intellect. Wisdom is just seeing things clearly as they are, this wondrous function of the mind. It can be in the most mundane things: Who’s going to arrive to class? How can I solve this?; How can I remove this stain if it’s possible? There’s incredible wisdom in the ordinary when you see things just as they are.

If you don’t do that, that’s when the dharmas are misunderstood, and you think things are happening to you. You think, “Why is this happening to me? Why now?” Then that produces more and more ignorance.

Sometimes you just have to take it. It doesn’t mean you can’t change things, but if things are happening to you, you just accept it. You move along, and you try to create something a little better in the immediate and extended future. Understand that sometimes it’s just way things are. It’s like you being in a car that’s the engine stopped working on a very hot day. You’ve got to take it. The car is not going to start and it’s going to be hot and uncomfortable. Sometimes that’s just the way it is, but you can learn from that. You can change things a little as you go along. But the most important thing you learn is that it’s impermanent. It’s going to change. In a few minutes, somebody is going to pick you up, and you’re going to be in an air-conditioned car. It’s not the end of the world, and you come to see things in a very, very clear way. You see things in terms of causes and conditions that arise.

Coming and going thus,Is there need for thorough investigation?

Again, this is where the other masters were critiquing him: Is there need for investigation? But he’s stating mind in the best way he can. He’s speaking from the mountaintop, and he’s not speaking from the getting there. He’s saying, once you get there then you ask, “Who is reciting the Buddha’s name?” It’s a different “Who’s reciting the Buddha’s name,” at that point. But until you get there, of course you have to investigate.

If you remember there’s a story about a young monk whose master told him “I have nothing to teach you.”

And the monk said, “But Master, Master if you have nothing to teach me, why am I learning from you?”

And the master replied, “You learn from me until you realize that I have nothing to teach you.”

It’s just in this way. This master is talking from the mountaintop but he’s not telling this student not to learn. He’s telling this student to learn until you realize that ultimately it is just in this way. This master is speaking of suchness, not Tao, not the way to go there. He’s not concerned about the Tao. He’s just telling you this is the way it is.

Arising without the mark of arising,

Very interesting line. What do you think this means? Don’t be afraid to be wrong.

Student: I’ll be wrong. So like how a way arises, it’s also falling. So the idea of motion; it’s both arising and falling at the same time.

Gilbert: What would be this mark of arising? Your analogy is good analogy. You just need to go a little deeper into it.

Student: I don’t know if I can.

Gilbert: We’re not moving on until you do.

Student: [Laughs…] Ok, maybe if I knew more…

Gilbert: You’ll never know.

Student: Ok, isn’t the mark going to be where it stops and there’s a single point?

Gilbert: Or starts. Anybody else?

Another student: I was thinking if there’s a mark, then that’s the consciousness. Arising without the mark, is that because there is no mark? There’s no above, below, start, end.

Gilbert: You’re adding a little more to what she’s saying.

Third Student: Isn’t it true that once we place a mark on something it staples it to the moment and thus makes it less real?

Gilbert: Yes, this is very interesting, but can you make it less real?

Another student: Define real.

Gilbert: Well, there you go.

Student: Do you think they want you to make mark on it or stop it in time or something like that, or start it at a time or is it that you…

Gilbert: All you’re saying is that these things need to be processed. So the idea here is for me to facilitate you looking into it. So if you read that and said, “That sounds so good; but what does it mean?” And you go, “Well, I don’t know!” But now you’re working on it; you’re actually trying to penetrate it.

Another student: I have another metaphor – it would be like trying to pin a wave on the sand. It doesn’t work.

Gilbert: Or pin a wave on the water?

Same student: Yes, that was the image I was trying to present. In pinning, it makes the whole point move.

Gilbert: Yes. So we’ll continue on:

Arising and illumination are the same.

This clears it up quite a little bit. Sentha is going to come in and gobble up all the coins right now.

Student: Arising and illumination are the same – subject-object; there’s no subject-object.

Gilbert: I don’t know if they say that though. They just say they’re the same. That’s the difference and that’s what the critique was on this master – what happened to the two truths? But he’s not saying something inconsistent with the two truths. Now we’re going way above [you know] your pay grade right now. Try to look at that “arising and illumination are the same.”

Same student: It’s just mind. The mind is arising; the mind is illuminated. It’s not two.

Gilbert: It’s an interesting thing because he’s saying, but he’s not negating arising. That’s an important aspect; that’s the relative truth. This is very, very important because what’s going on here is he’s trying to relate to say arising (phenomena) and illumination are exactly the same, so he’s going to the Single-Truth Doctrine but not negating the Two-Truth Doctrine of phenomena arising.

So when the world is seen in this way - by awareness, it’s aware of phenomena arising, clearly aware of phenomena arising. Not only aware of it but by Law of Dependent Origination, it is aware that there is a cause to it arising and seeing it clearly from that viewpoint, that it doesn’t negate the arising but does not separate it out from the rest of it. Like an egg and a yoke, they comprise an egg. You take the yoke out, it’s no longer an egg. It’s a yoke. But nevertheless, within that sphere before you open that egg up, it’s just that way.

So you see the potentiality of things there within the mind that’s arising, but you know clearly that this illumination, the very illumination of it, is mind itself. And the mind, which you might want to call the noumenon, does not interfere with the phenomena that’s arising. It does not censor it. It allows everything to arise perfectly in accordance with causes and conditions. Because all of it is fundamentally empty, it’s impermanent. Any ideas about that? Did I lose you?

Student: That’s stillness, right – when the mind accepts the thoughts that are arising?

Gilbert: It’s fundamentally still; it doesn’t have to accept anything. That type of acceptance is arising. Fundamentally, it’s still. That’s the illumination side. It’s just a minor tweak to turn the mind’s eye inward.

Same student: I don’t get it.

Gilbert: You’ll never get it.

Same student: I mean the fact that there is the acceptance of the illumination and arising happening, then that in itself is stillness. Not the two like unlabeled, like…. never mind…

Gilbert: No-mind, and just-mind, and then the last one, which is never mind. (Laughs…) I wrote a poem like that once, where things are no-mind or just-mind and in the end, I just said “Never mind.” Just let it be. But it’s good; you need to kind of punch through that.

Desiring to purify the mind, There is no mind for effort.

You can’t purify the mind. You can’t sit in meditation and try to stop the mind from arising. We don’t stop the thoughts from arising, we are just aware of the arising and the mind is aware via Mahāprajñāpāramitā, this Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi, that this is just the way it is. So we don’t have to purify it. We just see it as it is, and we’re clear about it. When I say “we’re clear,” mind is clear about it; not “we.” And it’s effortless. There are times when I talk about it, it’s like a “hot knife through butter.” And when the mind is in a state of Chan, as it’s traversing the environment, it’s like a hot knife through butter; it’s effortlessly.

Student: And when the mind is not in a state of Chan…

Gilbert: And when the mind is not in a state of Chan? You’re trying to trick me with words here.

Same student: It’s not a trick; it’s an important clarification.

Gilbert: Go ahead.

Same student: When we perceive that the mind is not in a state of Chan, what we typically try to do is “Okay, I’m going to improve it, improve it, improve it” until it hits the end of state of Chan and there’s no way you can do that. You just have to let go and the state of Chan is already there.

Gilbert: That’s why he says the desire to purify the mind there is no mind for effort. It is just using the wisdom to do it. We don’t need to purity mind. We just need to let go of ignorance and grasping - this akusala mind that is constantly grasping and clinging. And the most egregious of that is the notion of an ego, a life in being, or a self and seeing the world from that view point, which is not other than just simply arising.

But when the mind is illuminated from our practice called Silent Illumination, then the world is just seen “as it is” – clearly that it’s just mind. And all these things and all these imperfections within mind arise from causes and conditions, so we are clear about that. We are very, very clear about what is happening in any given moment. That is a state of Chan. In the state of Chan, then as we practice, the self begins to get lesser, and lesser, and lesser. It doesn’t mean that you disappear. It just means that this body that you are using becomes much more functional.

Spontaneous wisdom Throughout time and space Nothing is illuminated;This is most profound.Knowing dharmas is non-knowing;(dharmas means phenomena)Non-knowing is knowing the essential.

We’ll start at the end – what is the essential?

Student: Mind.

Gilbert: Yes, mind. That’s the essential. If we say what is the essence of mind?

Student: Mind.

Gilbert: What is the primary meaning of mind?

Student: Mind.

Gilbert: There you go. See, it’s pretty easy right? Even you can get that one Vic.

Student: I got the first one, not the last one. (Laughs…)

Gilbert: So this idea is saying that the state of not-knowing is the state where subject and object are at a point where there is a clarity there - an understanding of subject and object that becomes no longer a knowing from any kind of a view point. It is, let’s say, a gnosis as to what mind is and a fusion of subject and object. Not necessarily negating them; the relative truth is still there, but the knows knows – mind knows. It knows via not-knowing – not creating the idea of subject and object going, “Oh, I see. I got it now.” And that is where people, when they are really practicing well and they’re at a retreat, and as soon as they go, “I’ve got it!” they mess it up because they’re waiting to get that brass ring.

But if they don’t do that, if they just pierce through that, there can be very great strides as far as the obscuration of the mind. Mind is self-revealing. What is the self-revealing of mind is the self-nature of mind. There is, in our practice, that essence. And this is very important because going back to the very beginning of Buddhism and the concept of Nirvana, we talked about this the other night, the definition of Nirvana is blowing out. But it’s not blowing out phenomena, it’s blowing out the ignorance that gives rise to the idea of a life in being. And instead of blowing out and being in the dark, it absolutely illuminates – everything is perfectly in its place.

It is this tweaking of Buddhist thought that came through the Madhyamaka School, in terms of looking at things, and seeing Buddha-nature and through the Tathagatagarbha Sutraswhere all of a sudden, Buddha-nature is there and we talk about self-nature of mind. Not necessarily in some people and some philosophers and professors, say that’s essentialism. Essentialism being there is something there; whether it’s an alter-ego or a super-ego, or whatever, or a deity, or whatever. We don’t subscribe to that. It’s simply that they cannot see the transcendent wisdom that enables the world to be seen as it is, with impermanence to all phenomenal nature. And that impermanence to all phenomenal nature has to be there in order for mind to be. It has to be there. It’s not be [let’s say] one bowl of Jello there that never gets dried up, or gets hard, or loses its color, or whatever. It would shatter the notion of mind. All phenomena is precisely empty. It is just this way. And when we see things in this way, we’re clear about it.

So when we’re sitting on our cushion and we meditate, we just let go. We just let go, let go, let go… Whatever phenomena comes up, we let go. Whatever thinking is coming up in the mind, let it go. You become adept at just letting it go, letting it go, letting it go. Something very incredible happens if you do that. It won’t be that you’ll become comatose or an automaton that’s meditating or reciting some method, the mind will become very bright and illuminated that defies the words “bright or illuminated or clear” that we use in our parlance to try to describe these sensations or experience. It’s way beyond that. And it’s not necessarily a grandiose experience. It could be but it’s very mundane. It converts the phenomena there to the coin of the realm, and the coin of the realm is what?

Student: Mind.

Gilbert: See? I was giving that one to you. Yes?

Student: You said letting go but I’m wondering. Letting go of phenomenon does it by not attaching to them. But to let it go, you have to attach to it to let it go, right?

Gilbert: Say the last part again?

Same student: To let it go, you have to attach to it to let it go naturally otherwise, it’ll just keep coming up.

Gilbert: It’s like you’re on a train ride and you’re watching the scenery go by. You just let it go by, let it go by. You understand the big difference in the scenery as you’re coming along. You don’t attach to it. You’re just aware of it. So any moment here, you’re aware of this impermanence in everything that happens. It’s like I was talking about the Dharma, and in a few minutes I’m going to be taking a rest from talking about the Dharma. I’m not thinking about that time when I’m going to take a rest because I’m taking a rest right now from working. So you just let the scenery go by. It doesn’t mean that you’re dead to it. Quite the opposite, mind is very dynamic, very spontaneous; spontaneous wisdom it says. So there’s this spontaneous wisdom arising from what’s there.

Now you could be building two different kinds of fires. One of them, you could be building a fire of ignorance in the present moment, creating more and more desires, more and more ignorance and hatred. Or you could be building a fire of wisdom and if you can continue to see moment-to-moment mind as it is, then you’re generating great wisdom. That great wisdom will provide you with a different view point – one that does not have the idea of self there; at least self in the notion that we think about self. Not self as in the self-nature of mind but something else.

But that’s the beauty of all these machinations that we’re going through. Through the Abhidharma School, the Yogacara School and the Madhyamaka School coming through and saying that there’s still something here. We don’t disregard that. It’s not this emptiness in this English word “emptiness.” It stands for impermanence of all things but we see that very clearly and it’s on this bed of mind. Any other questions? Ok, let’s see where we’re at. I think I’m going to stop there. We’re only averaging four stanzas per class.